Freedom of Speech vs. Political Correctness

[daws101]

Its not a straw man. Shit likes that happens. Just because you dont leave your couch, doesn't mean the rest of us don't.
LMAO yea, I am a so PC its CRAZY man!

FUCK you you lazy ****** ********* *******E!

^Nothing will happen to me.

You are like a fuckin kid

How unPC of you.

Looks like I was right and you were wrong. AGAIN. Dumbfuck.

Are you feeling intimidated?

Just read his posts they reek of fear.

 

[BULLDOG]

Political Correctness is not a constitutional issue, it's a cultural issue.

The PC Police aren't robbing you of your right to speak freely. What they have done instead is create a culture of intimidation and "consequences" for anyone who says anything they don't like. Does that work against the spirit of freedom of speech? Yes. But it's not about the Constitution.

"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it" is not on their minds. They want to shut you up, and they'll find a way to do it.
.

Has there ever been a time when there was no consequence to what anyone said? Do you think it would be better if there was never any consequence to a persons words?

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

You choose to issue the consequences. Your choice. You don't have to.

I get it. "Too bad". I know.
.

Correct. I get to chose how I respond to your remarks any way I want, just like you get to chose how you respond. It's not denying any of your rights. It's the way life works. Quit whining and grow up.

 

[NightFox]

Okay, explain how they're taking away your rights to Freedom of Speech by shouting you down at a rally or getting you fired.
.

The same way a criminal with gun forcing you hand over your wallet is "taking away" your right to dispose of your property as you see fit. IMHO If one person prevents another person from exercising his/her rights then it's an infringement upon that persons liberty and thus immoral, the method or means used *may* not be illegal but it's still immoral and shouldn't be tolerated in a civilized, free society.

 

[Mac1958]

Quit whining and grow up.

Quit being so narcissistic & punitive and grow up.

 

[BULLDOG]

Political Correctness is not a constitutional issue, it's a cultural issue.

The PC Police aren't robbing you of your right to speak freely. What they have done instead is create a culture of intimidation and "consequences" for anyone who says anything they don't like. Does that work against the spirit of freedom of speech? Yes. But it's not about the Constitution.

"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it" is not on their minds. They want to shut you up, and they'll find a way to do it.
.

Has there ever been a time when there was no consequence to what anyone said? Do you think it would be better if there was never any consequence to a persons words?

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

Why should there be "consequences", including and up to losing your job just for saying you think marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why should there be "consequences" just because you think illegal immigrants should be deported? Why should there be "consequences" because you think random college hookups between drunk people is not automatically rape if the woman decides later she doesn't like what happened?

There are always consequences to anything that is said. asking why is as dumb as asking why the sun comes up in the East. It just is. Live with it.

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, explain how they're taking away your rights to Freedom of Speech by shouting you down at a rally or getting you fired.
.

The same way a criminal with gun forcing you hand over your wallet is "taking away" your right to dispose of your property as you see fit. IMHO If one person prevents another person from exercising his/her rights then it's an infringement upon that persons liberty and thus immoral, the method or means used *may* not be illegal but it's still immoral and shouldn't be tolerated in a civilized, free society.

Oh, I agree it shouldn't be tolerated, and it's nice seeing the pushback continue.

These people are liars and cowards.
.

 

[jwoodie]

Okay, explain how they're taking away your rights to Freedom of Speech by shouting you down at a rally or getting you fired.

"Okay" is not an answer to my question, Brainiac.

 

[martybegan]

Political Correctness is not a constitutional issue, it's a cultural issue.

The PC Police aren't robbing you of your right to speak freely. What they have done instead is create a culture of intimidation and "consequences" for anyone who says anything they don't like. Does that work against the spirit of freedom of speech? Yes. But it's not about the Constitution.

"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it" is not on their minds. They want to shut you up, and they'll find a way to do it.
.

Has there ever been a time when there was no consequence to what anyone said? Do you think it would be better if there was never any consequence to a persons words?

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

Why should there be "consequences", including and up to losing your job just for saying you think marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why should there be "consequences" just because you think illegal immigrants should be deported? Why should there be "consequences" because you think random college hookups between drunk people is not automatically rape if the woman decides later she doesn't like what happened?

There are always consequences to anything that is said. asking why is as dumb as asking why the sun comes up in the East. It just is. Live with it.

Screw that. the problem is people have become hypersensitive, and just cant stand that other can have opposing views than they do. The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

It's terrible when government does it, and not much better when other people do it.

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, explain how they're taking away your rights to Freedom of Speech by shouting you down at a rally or getting you fired.

"Okay" is not an answer to my question, Brainiac.

Ugh. You think this is a constitutional issue, I don't.

I guess that's about it.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

The proper response for mature, reasonable adults to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

There, fixed it.
.

 

[BluesLegend]

Political correctness is an attack on free speech and its intentional. Just part of the lefts wider assault on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

 

[martybegan]

The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

The proper response for mature, reasonable adults to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

There, fixed it.
.

Its sad that one has to make that clarification.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Freedom of Speech vs. Political Correctness

I hate PC, with a passion. Any true liberal would.

That funny stuff, there...lol

 

[jwoodie]

Ugh. You think this is a constitutional issue, I don't.

I guess that's about it.
.

I guess that's about all one can expect from a denizen of the Politics Forum.

 

[Mac1958]

The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

The proper response for mature, reasonable adults to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

There, fixed it.
.

Its sad that one has to make that clarification.

Yep!
.

 

[daws101]

Political correctness is an attack on free speech and its intentional. Just part of the lefts wider assault on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

This and other fallicies on sale now!

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, explain how they're taking away your rights to Freedom of Speech by shouting you down at a rally or getting you fired.

"Okay" is not an answer to my question, Brainiac.

Ugh. You think this is a constitutional issue, I don't.

I guess that's about it.
.

I guess that's about all one can expect from a denizen of the Politics Forum.

Well, we all aspire to be you.
.

 

[BULLDOG]

Has there ever been a time when there was no consequence to what anyone said? Do you think it would be better if there was never any consequence to a persons words?

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

Why should there be "consequences", including and up to losing your job just for saying you think marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why should there be "consequences" just because you think illegal immigrants should be deported? Why should there be "consequences" because you think random college hookups between drunk people is not automatically rape if the woman decides later she doesn't like what happened?

There are always consequences to anything that is said. asking why is as dumb as asking why the sun comes up in the East. It just is. Live with it.

Screw that. the problem is people have become hypersensitive, and just cant stand that other can have opposing views than they do. The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

It's terrible when government does it, and not much better when other people do it.

Glad to hear you feel that way. Does that mean you will stop pushing for the government to restrict gay marriage, or abortions, or legalized pot, or etc, etc., etc. ? To do otherwise would make you a hypocrite,....right?

 

[daws101]

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

Why should there be "consequences", including and up to losing your job just for saying you think marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why should there be "consequences" just because you think illegal immigrants should be deported? Why should there be "consequences" because you think random college hookups between drunk people is not automatically rape if the woman decides later she doesn't like what happened?

There are always consequences to anything that is said. asking why is as dumb as asking why the sun comes up in the East. It just is. Live with it.

Screw that. the problem is people have become hypersensitive, and just cant stand that other can have opposing views than they do. The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

It's terrible when government does it, and not much better when other people do it.

Glad to hear you feel that way. Does that mean you will stop pushing for the government to restrict gay marriage, or abortions, or legalized pot, or etc, etc., etc. ? To do otherwise would make you a hypocrite,....right?

Of course not, martyr began's version of freedom of expression is the only one .

 

[martybegan]

"Ever" and "never" in the same post.

This is how you folks handle this. You drag it down to the absurd in an effort to deflect.

You choose to issue consequences.
.

Because the subject is absurd. There are always consequences to anything that is said. You whine about political correctness when what you really want is to deny free speech to people who disagree with your dumb remarks. Say what you want, but you have to expect what ever consequences.arise from what you say.

Why should there be "consequences", including and up to losing your job just for saying you think marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why should there be "consequences" just because you think illegal immigrants should be deported? Why should there be "consequences" because you think random college hookups between drunk people is not automatically rape if the woman decides later she doesn't like what happened?

There are always consequences to anything that is said. asking why is as dumb as asking why the sun comes up in the East. It just is. Live with it.

Screw that. the problem is people have become hypersensitive, and just cant stand that other can have opposing views than they do. The proper response to speech you don't like is 1) disagreeing with the person 2)disagreeing and arguing your point or 3) disagreeing and telling the person to piss off. The proper response is not trying to ruin them, or trying to silence them, or trying to intimidate them into silence.

It's terrible when government does it, and not much better when other people do it.

Glad to hear you feel that way. Does that mean you will stop pushing for the government to restrict gay marriage, or abortions, or legalized pot, or etc, etc., etc. ? To do otherwise would make you a hypocrite,....right?

My issue isn't with gay marriage, or abortion, or legalized pot (faster please). My issue with the first two is my view that the federal constitution does not give the federal government or the courts the ability to say either one is a constitutional right. If given then chance I wouldn't vote to restrict marriage to man and a woman, in fact the opposite is true. As for abortion I would vote against anything that bans it before the 3rd trimester, but I would support parental notification for minors.

As for Pot, as long as it is grown in a state where it is sold, the feds should have no involvement either.

Plus, all 3 of those are actions or events, not speech.